Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
Hungary - Metropolitan Court, 23 September 2009, M.A.A. v. Office of Immigration and Nationality, 21.K.31484/2009/6
Country of applicant: Somalia

The Office of Immigration and Nationality (OIN) found the applicant not credible and therefore did not assess the risk of serious harm. Instead the OIN granted protection against refoulement. The Metropolitan Court ruled that the OIN was obliged to assess conditions for subsidiary protection and serious harm even if the applicant was not found credible.

Date of decision: 23-09-2009
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 15 (c),Art 15 (b),Art 4.3,Art 7,Art 10.1 (a),Art 6,Art 4.5,Art 10.1 (c),UNHCR Handbook,Para 38,Para 37,Para 41,Para 42,Para 65,Para 39,Para 40,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3
Hungary - Metropolitan Court, 2 July 2009, K.A.F v. Office of Immigration and Nationality, 15.K.30.401/2009/12
Country of applicant: Sudan

The case concerned an appeal against a refusal to grant refugee status on the grounds that the applicant lacked credibility as the country of origin information (COI) submitted by the applicant was not verified by the national documentation service providing COI. 

Date of decision: 02-07-2009
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 4.1,Art 4.3,Art 4,Art 10.2
France - Council of State, 15 May 2009, Miss K., n°292564
Country of applicant: Iraq

As soon as one persecution ground (in this case religion) exists and the other conditions for qualifying for refugee status are fulfilled, refugee status must be recognised rather than subsidiary protection, including in a context of generalised violence. 

Date of decision: 15-05-2009
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 4.3,Art 2,Art 7,Art 15,Art 10,Art 6
Italy - Court of Cassation, 21 October 2008, RG 2540/2006
Country of applicant: Iraq

A major shift is currently taking place in the rules on burden of proof as regards the granting of international protection. It is up to the Commission and the courts to cooperate in checking the conditions that enable protection to be granted and they should obtain information concerning the country of origin by official means.

Date of decision: 21-10-2008
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 4.3,Art 8.2 (b),Art 4.5
Czech Republic - Supreme Administrative Court, 30 September 2008, S.N. v Ministry of Interior, 5 Azs 66/2008-70
Country of applicant: Kazakhstan

This case concerned an appeal against the refusal of international protection to an Imam from Kazakhstan who claimed persecution from state actors because of his religion. The Ministry of Interior (MOI) and the Regional Court considered that persecution had not been established, and that the behaviour of the authorities had not been motivated by the applicant’s religious belief of “pure Islam” (this is a term that is used to distinguish themselves from other Muslims). However, the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) disagreed and found that due to the specific circumstances of the applicant (an Imam) there was a risk of persecution. The Court also stated that refugee status can involve risk that is motivated by more than one reason, so long as one of those reasons is a persecution ground.

Date of decision: 30-09-2008
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 2 (e),Art 4.3,Art 9,Art 4.4,Art 4.5,Art 33,Art 9.2 (b),Art 9.2 (c),UNHCR Handbook,Para 195,Para 200,Para 201,Para 202,Para 203,Para 204,Para 196,Para 197,Para 198,Para 199
Czech Republic – Regional Court in Prague, 14 August 2008, O.S. v Ministry of Interior, 48 Az 57/2008
Country of applicant: Turkey

Country of origin information must be up-to-date and balanced. A report of the European Commission evaluating Turkey as potential member of the EU is political and biased, and should only be used as a supporting document.

Date of decision: 14-08-2008
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 4.3,Art 8.2,Art 2 (c)
Ireland - High Court, 27 June 2008, A.B.O. v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2008] IEHC 191
Country of applicant: Nigeria

This case concerned the test to be applied by the Minister as the decision-maker in applications for subsidiary protection. The Court held that it was permissible for the Minister to have regard to the reports and findings of other decision-makers in the asylum process (specifically the Refugee Appeals Tribunal). However, a particularly careful and thorough analysis will be required if the case for subsidiary protection is put on an entirely new basis which has never been considered at any stage of the process. In relation to state protection, the Court reiterated that the onus lies on an applicant to provide clear and convincing proof of a state’s inability to protect its citizens.

Date of decision: 27-06-2008
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 4.1,Art 4.2,Art 4.3,Art 4.3 (e),Art 4,Art 4.3 (c),Art 4.3 (a),Art 4.3 (b),Art 4.3 (d)
Germany - High Administrative Court of Baden-Wurttemberg, 20 May 2008, A 10 S 72/08
Country of applicant: Pakistan

Art 10.1 (b) of the Qualification Directive guarantees wide reaching protection of the freedom of religion. However, merely belonging to the Ahmadiyya religious community does not justify the granting of refugee status.

Date of decision: 20-05-2008
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 4.3,Art 9.2,Art 10.1 (b),Art 9.1,Art 2 (c),EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 9
España - Tribunal Supremo, 15 febrero 2008, Nº 6252/2004
Country of applicant: Nigeria

The applicant lodged an appeal before the Supreme Court against the High National Court’s decision to reject her asylum application. She claimed to have experienced persecution in Nigeria for religious reasons: her parents were killed in a religious confrontation between Muslims and Catholics. However, she did not explain how this fact was linked to a subsequent persecution. The Court held that the applicant was not a victim of religious persecution in accordance with the 1951 Refugee Convention, but that she had fled from a general conflict and a situation of political instability.

Date of decision: 15-02-2008
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 4.3,Art 10.1 (b),Art 1
Germany - Administrative Court Köln, 12 October 2007, 18 K 6334/05.A
Country of applicant: Iraq

Currently every Sunnite and Shiite from Central and South Iraq is to be considered as a refugee within the meaning of Section 60 (1) Residence Act and the 1951 Refugee Convention, if he/she originates from a region with mixed denominations.

Returnees who originate from regions of mixed denominations cannot obtain internal protection in any part of Iraq.

Date of decision: 12-10-2007
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 8,Art 4.3,Art 7,Art 9,Art 10.1 (d),Art 10,Art 4,Art 6,Art 4.4,Art 1A,UNHCR Handbook,Para 38,Para 37,Para 41,Para 42,Para 39,Para 40,Art 2 (c),Para 44,Para 43,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3,Article 4,Article 5,Article 7,Article 8,Article 9,Article 11,Article 12,Article 15